On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 13:10:45 +0300
Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 1:05 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote:
> > To do some rewording in regard with the current topic: if Pacemaker is able
> > to stop its resources after a quorum lost, it will not reboot, no "death"
> >
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 1:05 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote:
> To do some rewording in regard with the current topic: if Pacemaker is able to
> stop its resources after a quorum lost, it will not reboot, no "death" either.
>
And how exactly is the remaining quorate partition supposed to
On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 12:56:40 +0300
Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:43 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:45:40 -0400
> > Digimer wrote:
> >
> > > On 2021-07-21 3:26 a.m., Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 22:02:21 -0400
"Frank D. Engel, Jr." wrote:
> In OpenVMS, the kernel is aware of the cluster. As is mentioned in that
> presentation, it actually stops processes from running and blocks access
> to clustered storage when quorum is lost, and resumes them appropriately
>
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:43 PM Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:45:40 -0400
> Digimer wrote:
>
> > On 2021-07-21 3:26 a.m., Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 04:28:30 + (UTC)
> > > Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
> >
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:45:40 -0400
Digimer wrote:
> On 2021-07-21 3:26 a.m., Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 04:28:30 + (UTC)
> > Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk. Also, you can use iscsi
On 2021-07-21 3:26 a.m., Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 04:28:30 + (UTC)
> Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk. Also, you can use iscsi from that
>> node as a SBD device, so you will have proper fencing .If
On 21/07/2021 09:50, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote:
OpenVMS can do this sort of thing without a requirement for fencing (you
still need a third disk as a quorum device in a 2-node cluster), but
Linux (at least in its current form) cannot. From what I can tell the
fencing requirements in the Linux
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 04:50:09 -0400
"Frank D. Engel, Jr." wrote:
> OpenVMS can do this sort of thing without a requirement for fencing (you
> still need a third disk as a quorum device in a 2-node cluster), but
> Linux (at least in its current form) cannot.
Yes it can, as far as what you are
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 11:50 AM Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote:
>
> OpenVMS can do this sort of thing without a requirement for fencing (you
> still need a third disk as a quorum device in a 2-node cluster), but
> Linux (at least in its current form) cannot. From what I can tell the
> fencing
OpenVMS can do this sort of thing without a requirement for fencing (you
still need a third disk as a quorum device in a 2-node cluster), but
Linux (at least in its current form) cannot. From what I can tell the
fencing requirements in the Linux solution are mainly due to limitations
of how
Hi,
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 04:28:30 + (UTC)
Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
> Hi,
> consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk. Also, you can use iscsi from that
> node as a SBD device, so you will have proper fencing .If you don't have a
> hardware watchdog device, you can use softdog kernel
On 21.07.2021 07:28, Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
> Hi,
> consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk.
What was not clear in "Quorum is a different concept and doesn't remove
the need for fencing"?
> Also, you can use iscsi from that node as a SBD device, so you will have
> proper fencing .If
Hi,
consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk. Also, you can use iscsi from that node
as a SBD device, so you will have proper fencing .If you don't have a hardware
watchdog device, you can use softdog kernel module for that.
Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 1:45, Digimer
On 2021-07-20 6:04 p.m., john tillman wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Is it possible to configure a two node cluster (pacemaker 2.0) without
> fencing and avoid split brain?
No.
> I was hoping there was a way to use a 3rd node's ip address, like from a
> network switch, as a tie breaker to provide
Greetings,
Is it possible to configure a two node cluster (pacemaker 2.0) without
fencing and avoid split brain?
I was hoping there was a way to use a 3rd node's ip address, like from a
network switch, as a tie breaker to provide quorum. A simple successful
ping would do it.
I realize that
16 matches
Mail list logo
